Powered Two wheelers in Cycle Lanes

[TimO]

but it's not particularly pleasant to be waiting at some lights with a motorcyclists sitting next to you, gunning his engine, and you know that he's going to try and turn left across your path when the lights go green.   

When in such a situation (as I often am on the Balls Pond road), I generally find it helps to make eye contact with the motorcyclist and establish who is going where.   Sometimes I have to wait a fraction of a second, sometimes they do.  It isn't a big deal. 

It's not that it's a big deal if I'm delayed a few seconds, it's the fact that I'm perfectly correctly, legally and safely positioned, being forced to give way to a motorcyclist who has moved into an area where he is not supposed to be, isn't indicating and is revving his engine like an idiot, basically behaving aggressively, and trying to force me to give way to him, when he pulled up after me and isn't in a safe position to turn left (well, not safe for me anyway).  I'm not suggesting all motorcyclists do this, but a greater proportion of motorcyclists seem to behave in this sort of idiotic manner than car drivers and other road users behave like dorks.

[Gattopardo]

I would like to see some valid research on the subject before I let my anecdotal evidence decide me.  I probably notice the bad scooteristas more than I do the sensible bikers, but some solid research is long overdue, and that is all that Regulator is suggesting, as far as i can tell.

There were three Tfl reports, first one - inconclusive more data needed.  Second report after taking on board the criticsm of the first, was given to TFl and members on the comittee yet never published used better research methodolgy.  The third report that was published by TFL is similar to the first report in it data and research methodolgy.

On the second reports finding London borough of westminster has allow motorcycles in bus lanes as does the London Borough of Kingston.  But the findings from the other areas, such as bristol to name one of many, are not acceptable as comparable data.

But hey when someone quotes their qualifications as to why their view of a report is best, I take that as an inadequacy in themselves as they never seem to wonder the qualifications of the person asking the question. By the way I have two doctorates, one from and italian Universtiy and one from and English one, so know nothing about research methodolgy.  That was the first personal comment, after your few.  It is also the last .

[Gattopardo]

but it's not particularly pleasant to be waiting at some lights with a motorcyclists sitting next to you, gunning his engine, and you know that he's going to try and turn left across your path when the lights go green.   

When in such a situation (as I often am on the Balls Pond road), I generally find it helps to make eye contact with the motorcyclist and establish who is going where.   Sometimes I have to wait a fraction of a second, sometimes they do.  It isn't a big deal. 

It's not that it's a big deal if I'm delayed a few seconds, it's the fact that I'm perfectly correctly, legally and safely positioned, being forced to give way to a motorcyclist who has moved into an area where he is not supposed to be, isn't indicating and is revving his engine like an idiot, basically behaving aggressively, and trying to force me to give way to him, when he pulled up after me and isn't in a safe position to turn left (well, not safe for me anyway).  I'm not suggesting all motorcyclists do this, but a greater proportion of motorcyclists seem to behave in this sort of idiotic manner than car drivers and other road users behave like dorks.

What the tax disc on a motorbike say as vehicle? (whistling smilie)

[TimO]

... Second report after taking on board the criticsm of the first, was given to TFl and members on the comittee yet never published used better research methodolgy. ...

Erm, if it was never published how do we know it used a better methodology ?  The first and third reports have been published, so can be fairly criticised (or lauded), but anything about the second report would at best be based upon a non-official release of the report, which may not contain the full or complete information.

[Gattopardo]

Also note that you remeber the bad ones and not the others.

I Use the A23 and several others dependant on my ruote in.  I don't find any problems with the motorbikes but do see lots of red light jumping and pavement riding to avoid lights.  

I also don't like that route as the bus drivers do seem to play the get as close to your backwheel game.  Or the other favourite of over take the motorbike or cycle then pull in to the bus stop across two lanes and almost coliding with the people cycling in the bus lane.

[Gattopardo]

... Second report after taking on board the criticsm of the first, was given to TFl and members on the comittee yet never published used better research methodolgy. ...

Erm, if it was never published how do we know it used a better methodology ?  The first and third reports have been published, so can be fairly criticised (or lauded), but anything about the second report would at best be based upon a non-official release of the report, which may not contain the full or complete information.

Thats why I have offered copies of it ( freely available if google is your friend) for people to read.  It wasn't published but given to all members of the comitee.  Some mebers of the comunity have released it to the general public.

[Regulator]

The report is clear in its conclusions:

8.0 Concluding comments

8.1 Context

The evidence from this experiment offers more information about the impact of allowing P2W access to bus lanes than any study to date. Nevertheless, it is vital to recognise the scope and limitations of this test of a potential enhancement to road safety in a live experiment with several significant other variables; one of the most important being changes in highway usage by different modes during the investigation.

Changing the methodology for generating control data for the experiment during the second 18 month phase of the trial gave rise to problems. It rekindled initial questions about the experiment design, and generated new concerns among some stakeholders that the clarity, reliability and validity of results and conclusions might be reduced from optimum levels.
In addition to concerns about changes in control method, questions focused on the scientific value of data collected from attitudinal surveys.

Queries also arose regarding the collection of speed and journey time data and vehicle usage of the actual bus lanes themselves. The largest gap in the data sets concerned the vehicle usage data. The lack of these data resulted in the inability to produce any robust modal migration assessment and consequently any casualty rate analysis.

TfL has, where possible, addressed such questions and concerns with freshly focused action and this final report results from that action. The suite of reports and these conclusions are made in response to input from all concerned with the experiment, inside and outside TfL, and to optimise the value of the study to all parties interested in improving road safety for all road users.


8.2 Control method changes

The Tanner Test approach offers a more statistically robust outcome than the use of figures from control sites that are of correspondingly small size to trial sites.

However, the Tanner method cannot allow normalisation of data for any divergence in vehicle usage patterns between the trial and the control, and therefore cannot account for the impact of potential effects such as migration in assessing the impacts of the measure under test.

The original control data method does allow direct comparisons between adjacent routes for trial and control, and it allows the influence of migration to be taken into account when analysing the impact of the measure on casualty numbers and rates. However, the very limited vehicle usage data available meant that no meaningful assessment could be carried out.

[rae]

I'm not suggesting all motorcyclists do this, but a greater proportion of motorcyclists seem to behave in this sort of idiotic manner than car drivers and other road users behave like dorks.

It would appear that you have a different breed of motorcyclist to those in N1 and the City.   I've never really experienced that problem - I could see how I could experience it if I really wanted to, but with just a tiny bit of common sense, it can be avoided. 

Where motorcyclists do piss me off is when they block up the gaps in traffic so that I can't squeeze through.  To be fair to them, most let me through when they realise I am behind them. 

And let's face it, drafting mopeds is about the most fun you can have on the road, it's easy if they've got a fat kid riding them.

[Gattopardo]

The report is clear in its conclusions:

8.0 Concluding comments

8.1 Context

The evidence from this experiment offers more information about the impact of allowing P2W access to bus lanes than any study to date. Nevertheless, it is vital to recognise the scope and limitations of this test of a potential enhancement to road safety in a live experiment with several significant other variables; one of the most important being changes in highway usage by different modes during the investigation.

Changing the methodology for generating control data for the experiment during the second 18 month phase of the trial gave rise to problems. It rekindled initial questions about the experiment design, and generated new concerns among some stakeholders that the clarity, reliability and validity of results and conclusions might be reduced from optimum levels.
In addition to concerns about changes in control method, questions focused on the scientific value of data collected from attitudinal surveys.

Queries also arose regarding the collection of speed and journey time data and vehicle usage of the actual bus lanes themselves. The largest gap in the data sets concerned the vehicle usage data. The lack of these data resulted in the inability to produce any robust modal migration assessment and consequently any casualty rate analysis.

TfL has, where possible, addressed such questions and concerns with freshly focused action and this final report results from that action. The suite of reports and these conclusions are made in response to input from all concerned with the experiment, inside and outside TfL, and to optimise the value of the study to all parties interested in improving road safety for all road users.


8.2 Control method changes

The Tanner Test approach offers a more statistically robust outcome than the use of figures from control sites that are of correspondingly small size to trial sites.

However, the Tanner method cannot allow normalisation of data for any divergence in vehicle usage patterns between the trial and the control, and therefore cannot account for the impact of potential effects such as migration in assessing the impacts of the measure under test.

The original control data method does allow direct comparisons between adjacent routes for trial and control, and it allows the influence of migration to be taken into account when analysing the impact of the measure on casualty numbers and rates. However, the very limited vehicle usage data available meant that no meaningful assessment could be carried out.

Can you quote the published date of this data and title of the report and the page number
 of the quote?

Lets be clear about it.

Oh and can you remind why, in your opinion, does data from other areas not applicable to this.  But can be applicable to other campaigns?

[Gattopardo]

And let's face it, drafting mopeds is about the most fun you can have on the road, it's easy if they've got a fat kid riding them.

Pwning fat kids on scooters

[Air Dancer]

I think Venn and his diagrams would have something to say about all of this.

It seems motorcyclists (inc. scooters) would like to have a foot in every subset, if there was something to be gained from it.

[Regulator]

The report is clear in its conclusions:

8.0 Concluding comments

8.1 Context

The evidence from this experiment offers more information about the impact of allowing P2W access to bus lanes than any study to date. Nevertheless, it is vital to recognise the scope and limitations of this test of a potential enhancement to road safety in a live experiment with several significant other variables; one of the most important being changes in highway usage by different modes during the investigation.

Changing the methodology for generating control data for the experiment during the second 18 month phase of the trial gave rise to problems. It rekindled initial questions about the experiment design, and generated new concerns among some stakeholders that the clarity, reliability and validity of results and conclusions might be reduced from optimum levels.
In addition to concerns about changes in control method, questions focused on the scientific value of data collected from attitudinal surveys.

Queries also arose regarding the collection of speed and journey time data and vehicle usage of the actual bus lanes themselves. The largest gap in the data sets concerned the vehicle usage data. The lack of these data resulted in the inability to produce any robust modal migration assessment and consequently any casualty rate analysis.

TfL has, where possible, addressed such questions and concerns with freshly focused action and this final report results from that action. The suite of reports and these conclusions are made in response to input from all concerned with the experiment, inside and outside TfL, and to optimise the value of the study to all parties interested in improving road safety for all road users.


8.2 Control method changes

The Tanner Test approach offers a more statistically robust outcome than the use of figures from control sites that are of correspondingly small size to trial sites.

However, the Tanner method cannot allow normalisation of data for any divergence in vehicle usage patterns between the trial and the control, and therefore cannot account for the impact of potential effects such as migration in assessing the impacts of the measure under test.

The original control data method does allow direct comparisons between adjacent routes for trial and control, and it allows the influence of migration to be taken into account when analysing the impact of the measure on casualty numbers and rates. However, the very limited vehicle usage data available meant that no meaningful assessment could be carried out.

Can you quote the published date of this data and title of the report and the page number
 of the quote?

Lets be clear about it.

Oh and can you remind why, in your opinion, does data from other areas not applicable to this.  But can be applicable to other campaigns?

It's page 20 of this report, published by TfL in March 2008 and available from their web-site.

I won't bother responding to your other silly remark.  As I've said earlier, if you have a beef with me then take it offline.  Stop clogging threads with your childish chundering.

[nuttycyclist]

...

What the tax disc on a motorbike say as vehicle? (whistling smilie)

 

[Regulator]

...

What the tax disc on a motorbike say as vehicle? (whistling smilie)

 

Nothing - for the 37.8% of motorcyclists who evade paying VED.

[nuttycyclist]

You really don't like motorcyclists do you reg

[Regulator]

You really don't like motorcyclists do you reg

I do like motorcyclists - my father was one and I was one in the past.  Mr R is also one (or a mopedist...)

[PhilO]

...

What the tax disc on a motorbike say as vehicle? (whistling smilie)

 

Nothing - for the 37.8% of motorcyclists who evade paying VED.

That 37.8% figure has now been discredited, and IIRC the DVLA have revised their assumptions to give a more believable 5%ish.

Incidentally, this was reported (with some 'we knew it all along'-type gloating) in the same issue of MCN in which their columnist had a go at the CTC for not believing the TFL study on bus lane use... 

ETA: In fact, your own link reports that in a slightly very spun fashion:

The 2006 roadside survey showed an overall rate of VED evasion of 5%, but the rate
of evasion for motorcycles was 37.8% compared with 4.3% for private and light
goods vehicles. While submissions presented by motorcycle organisations to the 2007
Public Accounts Committee argued for a 50% margin of error, even this would
demonstrate a substantially higher rate of evasion for motorcycles. This disparity is
consistent with previous roadside surveys.

The recently published 2007 Roadside Survey estimated revenue loss through evasion
amongst motorcycles at 6% and in all vehicles at 1.5%. 18% of unlicensed
motorcycles were observed whilst a SORN declaration was in force and 58% had
been unlicensed for at least a year. Improvements in the way that the 2007 data was
collected and analysed mean that evasion estimates for 2007 are not directly
comparable with those from previous years.

(My bold)

[Regulator]

Read the rest Phil... 


Hansard (para. 7)

REVIEW OF VEHICLE EXCISE DUTY EVASION STATISTICS (independent review of DVLA figures after criticism - table 6(a) amended figure is pertinent)

[Notsototalnewbie]

but it's not particularly pleasant to be waiting at some lights with a motorcyclists sitting next to you, gunning his engine, and you know that he's going to try and turn left across your path when the lights go green.   

When in such a situation (as I often am on the Balls Pond road), I generally find it helps to make eye contact with the motorcyclist and establish who is going where.   Sometimes I have to wait a fraction of a second, sometimes they do.  It isn't a big deal. 

It's not that it's a big deal if I'm delayed a few seconds, it's the fact that I'm perfectly correctly, legally and safely positioned, being forced to give way to a motorcyclist who has moved into an area where he is not supposed to be, isn't indicating and is revving his engine like an idiot, basically behaving aggressively, and trying to force me to give way to him, when he pulled up after me and isn't in a safe position to turn left (well, not safe for me anyway).  I'm not suggesting all motorcyclists do this, but a greater proportion of motorcyclists seem to behave in this sort of idiotic manner than car drivers and other road users behave like dorks.

What the tax disc on a motorbike say as vehicle? (whistling smilie)

Ok, I'm going to admit that I don't understand Lynx's comment here and what it has to do with Tim's observation about motorcycles in the ASL?

[Jurek]

 It says 'Bicycle' on a motorcycle VED disc.

BTW, I ride a motorcycle regularly, have done so  for years, and I don't want them in bus lanes.

[Notsototalnewbie]

Ah, thanks Jurek. You can tell I've never studied one before!

[Jezza]

I reckon it's a good idea based on the strength of no evidence whatsoever, other than seeing it seem to work fairly well in Scandinavia. When you look at how many cars sitting in traffic only have one occupant in them, it seems to make sense to get more people on bikes of any sort. Bikes are smaller, more fuel efficient and less polluting. Helping those bikes avoid gridlock by having them in a selected lane would encourage more people to ride.

Seems like the people who are against it are citing experiences of bad or selfish riding - motorbikes whizzing past cyclists, etc. But that's just as much of a problem on the road itself. If the motorbike is ridden properly, to take into account the slower-moving cyclists, I can't see it's problem.   

I'm not a motorcyclist either. Yet.     

[Gattopardo]

It says 'Bicycle' on a motorcycle VED disc.

BTW, I ride a motorcycle regularly, have done so  for years, and I don't want them in bus lanes.

Can I ask why not?

[Gattopardo]

I reckon it's a good idea based on the strength of no evidence whatsoever, other than seeing it seem to work fairly well in Scandinavia. When you look at how many cars sitting in traffic only have one occupant in them, it seems to make sense to get more people on bikes of any sort. Bikes are smaller, more fuel efficient and less polluting. Helping those bikes avoid gridlock by having them in a selected lane would encourage more people to ride.

Seems like the people who are against it are citing experiences of bad or selfish riding - motorbikes whizzing past cyclists, etc. But that's just as much of a problem on the road itself. If the motorbike is ridden properly, to take into account the slower-moving cyclists, I can't see it's problem.   

I'm not a motorcyclist either. Yet.     

There are lots of bad or selfish riding cyclists too.

By the way motorcycling and cycling don't mix.  You'll be ostracised by both groups

[Regulator]

I reckon it's a good idea based on the strength of no evidence whatsoever, other than seeing it seem to work fairly well in Scandinavia. When you look at how many cars sitting in traffic only have one occupant in them, it seems to make sense to get more people on bikes of any sort. Bikes are smaller, more fuel efficient and less polluting. Helping those bikes avoid gridlock by having them in a selected lane would encourage more people to ride.

Seems like the people who are against it are citing experiences of bad or selfish riding - motorbikes whizzing past cyclists, etc. But that's just as much of a problem on the road itself. If the motorbike is ridden properly, to take into account the slower-moving cyclists, I can't see it's problem.   

I'm not a motorcyclist either. Yet.     

Err - no they're not.  In relation to some pollutants, motorcycles are less efficient and more polluting than the average car.

For example... CAT.INIST